this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
240 points (92.3% liked)
[Dormant] moved to !historymemes@piefed.social
3447 readers
1 users here now
THIS COMM HAS MOVED
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I would say probably not. I expect (and hope, I suppose) that things will sort themselves out more or less that way. We live in a time of great reconsideration of gender norms, and it's not absurd to see experimentation in such a period. I use neopronouns (nounself style excluded) as a courtesy, because I understand it brings comfort to many who use them and it's not much trouble simply to do so, but they/them is what I hope we all eventually settle on as standard for NB gender identities.
They/them is not used exclusively to refer to neuter things, so enbies not being gender neutral is irrelevant here. 'They' is a useful and pre-existing catch-all.
... why?
Is that any more absurd than "reducing males to he/him" or "reducing females to she/her"?
It's language, not a campaign medal. You don't need a separate example for every instance.
The whole point of pronouns, I would argue, is to not need a separate set for every instance.
Otherwise you may as well just use Dan/Dan/Dan's/Danself conjugated for each name.
Pronouns:
Are (generally) shorter than names, because there's less need for them to be unique and they're used more frequently.
Can be used even when you don't know specifics about a person or object, or they don't want to give out their name.
Everyone knows how to conjugate them, so once you know someone is a 'they', you can readily extrapolate to them, their, theirs.